Original Story: USAToday.com
PITTSBURGH (AP) — A major supplier to the oil and gas industry says it will begin disclosing 100% of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluid, with no exemptions for trade secrets. The move by Baker Hughes of Houston is a shift for a major firm; it's unclear if others will follow suit.
The oil and gas industry has said the fracking chemicals are disclosed at tens of thousands of wells, but environmental and health groups and government regulators say a loophole that allows companies to hide chemical "trade secrets" has been a major problem.
A statement on the Baker Hughes website said the company believes it's possible to disclose 100% "of the chemical ingredients we use in hydraulic fracturing fluids without compromising our formulations," to increase public trust.
"This really good news. It's a step in the right direction," said Dr. Bernard Goldstein, the former dean of the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health. "One hopes that the entire industry goes along with it."
But Goldstein noted one "major hedge" in the Baker Hughes position, since the company said it will provide complete lists of the products and chemical ingredients used in frack fluids "where accepted by our customers and relevant governmental authorities."
Still, Goldstein said the Baker Hughes language sets a new standard for transparency and "clearly distinguishes them from Halliburton," another major industry supplier.
Baker Hughes spokeswoman Melanie Kania wrote in an email that it will take "several months" for the new policy to take effect. She said the end result will be a "single list" that provides "all the chemical constituents" for frack fluids, with no trade secrets.
Amy Mall, a policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the Baker Hughes move is a positive step, and that "if one company can do it, it's very clear all companies can do it." Mall said NRDC doesn't believe companies should use the trade secret argument to hide drilling chemicals.
A spokeswoman for Houston-based Halliburton, another major oil and gas supplier, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
A boom in drilling has led to tens of thousands of new wells being drilled in recent years using the fracking process. A mix of water, sand and chemicals is forced into deep underground formations to break rock apart and free oil and gas. That's led to major economic benefits but also fears that the chemicals used in the process could spread to water supplies.
The mix of chemicals varies by company and region — and some of the chemicals are toxic and could cause health problems in significant doses — so the lack of full transparency has worried landowners and public health experts.
Many companies voluntarily disclose the contents of their fracking fluids through FracFocus.org, a website partially funded by the oil and gas industry that tracks fracking operations nationwide. But critics say the website has loose reporting standards and allows companies to avoid disclosure by declaring certain chemicals as trade secrets.
An Energy Department task force report issued in March that found that 84% of the wells registered on FracFocus invoked a trade secret exemption for at least one chemical. The Task Force said it "favors full disclosure of all known constituents added to fracturing fluid with few, if any exceptions."
The FracFocus website is managed by the Ground Water Protection Council and Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, both based in Oklahoma, and is funded by industry and the Energy Department.
Gerry Baker of the Oil and Gas Compact said he doesn't know of any other major supplier that has made a pledge similar to the one from Baker Hughes.
"It's a business decision on their part," Baker said. "Somehow, they've committed to this at the highest levels" of disclosure.
The Interior Department is expected to finalize proposed regulation for hydraulic fracturing on public lands by the end of the year. The measure would apply to some 700 million acres of federal lands and 56 million acres of lands controlled by federally recognized Indian tribes.
The rule proposed last year would require companies drilling for oil and natural gas to disclose chemicals used in fracking operations. The information would be made public.
The DOE said 25 states now mandate public disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, including 15 that use FracFocus as a reporting tool.
Industry groups oppose the disclosure rule, saying it would be costly for businesses, with little environmental or safety benefit. The American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry's top lobbying group, has praised the efforts of states to adopt the FracFocus database for disclosing chemicals, but has said additional federal regulations could jeopardize economic growth.
Asked about the Baker Hughes plan, API spokesman Zachary Cikanek said in an email that they "also welcome additional efforts by individual companies to increase public engagement and transparency."
Showing posts with label groundwater contamination. Show all posts
Showing posts with label groundwater contamination. Show all posts
Friday, April 25, 2014
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
EPA Wants to Revise Stormwater Regulations
Story first appeared in The Seattle Times.
The Presidential administration wants to change the rules applying to stormwater running off logging roads, blunting a landmark court ruling that found the muddy water running into salmon streams and reservoirs should be regulated like industrial pollution.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) filed notice Wednesday in the Federal Register proposing to revise stormwater regulations to say hundreds of thousands of miles of logging roads on private and public lands nationwide don't need the same kinds of permits that factories must get. Some of the roads are paved, but most are graveled, and some are bare dirt.
Instead, they would be regulated under a less stringent system known as "Best Management Practices," where authorities set up guidelines for the design and maintenance of logging roads to minimize erosion that sends mud into rivers.
The EPA is reviewing how states and tribes handle the issue, and plans to issue the new rules by Sept. 30, when an exemption for the timber industry enacted by Congress expires.
An EPA spokeswoman said the agency was taking advantage of flexibility within the Clean Water Act and would consider a range of approaches that did not require permits.
The move comes as the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether to hear the case. The high court asked the Obama administration's top lawyer to suggest whether the question needed higher review. The U.S. Solicitor General's brief is expected in a few days.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2010 that the muddy water running off roads used in industrial logging is the same as any other industrial pollution, requiring a Clean Water Act permit from the EPA. The case was brought by the Northwest Environmental Defense Center in Portland against the Oregon Department of Forestry over logging roads in Tillamook State Forest.
The timber industry said maintaining the status quo through-best management practices as suggested by the EPA was the best course but urged Congress to make permanent the temporary exemption granted the timber industry after the appeals-court ruling.
If allowed to stand, the 9th Circuit approach will cost hundreds of millions of dollars, kill thousands of jobs and invite protracted litigation over permit technicalities without any corresponding environmental benefit. Federal, state, tribal and private resource professionals agree that complicated and costly federal permits will not make our rivers and streams any cleaner.
The executive director of the Northwest Environmental Defense Center said industrial permits would provide better protection for salmon habitat and clean drinking water, and that the EPA could award blanket permits similar to those held by the Oregon Department of Transportation for paved roads to makes things less complicated.
EPA ought to provide clarity and certainty through guidance and rule-making, but the substance of the proposal is off-base.
EPA has long recognized that there are some industrial logging activities and logging roads that pollute streams and require (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits. The EPA will continue advocating that permits are required for industrial-scale activities, while looking for opportunities to be flexible or responsive to concerns about small forest landowners and nonindustrial logging activities.
The Presidential administration wants to change the rules applying to stormwater running off logging roads, blunting a landmark court ruling that found the muddy water running into salmon streams and reservoirs should be regulated like industrial pollution.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) filed notice Wednesday in the Federal Register proposing to revise stormwater regulations to say hundreds of thousands of miles of logging roads on private and public lands nationwide don't need the same kinds of permits that factories must get. Some of the roads are paved, but most are graveled, and some are bare dirt.
Instead, they would be regulated under a less stringent system known as "Best Management Practices," where authorities set up guidelines for the design and maintenance of logging roads to minimize erosion that sends mud into rivers.
The EPA is reviewing how states and tribes handle the issue, and plans to issue the new rules by Sept. 30, when an exemption for the timber industry enacted by Congress expires.
An EPA spokeswoman said the agency was taking advantage of flexibility within the Clean Water Act and would consider a range of approaches that did not require permits.
The move comes as the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether to hear the case. The high court asked the Obama administration's top lawyer to suggest whether the question needed higher review. The U.S. Solicitor General's brief is expected in a few days.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2010 that the muddy water running off roads used in industrial logging is the same as any other industrial pollution, requiring a Clean Water Act permit from the EPA. The case was brought by the Northwest Environmental Defense Center in Portland against the Oregon Department of Forestry over logging roads in Tillamook State Forest.
The timber industry said maintaining the status quo through-best management practices as suggested by the EPA was the best course but urged Congress to make permanent the temporary exemption granted the timber industry after the appeals-court ruling.
If allowed to stand, the 9th Circuit approach will cost hundreds of millions of dollars, kill thousands of jobs and invite protracted litigation over permit technicalities without any corresponding environmental benefit. Federal, state, tribal and private resource professionals agree that complicated and costly federal permits will not make our rivers and streams any cleaner.
The executive director of the Northwest Environmental Defense Center said industrial permits would provide better protection for salmon habitat and clean drinking water, and that the EPA could award blanket permits similar to those held by the Oregon Department of Transportation for paved roads to makes things less complicated.
EPA ought to provide clarity and certainty through guidance and rule-making, but the substance of the proposal is off-base.
EPA has long recognized that there are some industrial logging activities and logging roads that pollute streams and require (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits. The EPA will continue advocating that permits are required for industrial-scale activities, while looking for opportunities to be flexible or responsive to concerns about small forest landowners and nonindustrial logging activities.
For more Environmental News,
visit the Environmental Responsibility News blog.
For more national and worldwide Business News, visit the Peak News
Room blog.
For more local and state of Michigan Business News, visit
the Michigan Business News blog.
For more Health News, visit the
Healthcare and Medical News blog.
For more Electronics
News, visit the Electronics America blog.
For more Real Estate News,
visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For more Law News,
visit the Nation of Law blog.
For more Advertising
News, visit the Advertising, Marketing and Media blog.
For information on website optimization or for the latest SEO News, visit the SEO Done Right
blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)